Rune

I know, I know... still, if you get idiotic directions, you can still push for the most sensible way. Like a bigger vehicle launched to LEO, if you must use SLS, and then resupply on lunar orbit. Make Orion an emergency escape vehicle on that stack so it can be easily taken out if someone manages to get that money sink cancelled. Besides, being inevitable doesn't make it right, or unworthy of criticism, IMO. If it's a moronic plan to get to Mars, I will keep on thinking (and saying) that it is a moronic plan to get to Mars. You could even say I'm calling repurposed bovine waste on the whole idea, 'cause that's exactly what I'm trying to do. This is not a Mars plan. This will not be maintenance as it's usually understood here on Earth, that thing is not really going to be 'built' up there (given this plan, the thing won't get built, period, but let's keep talking hypotheticals). The crews that get it ready would do so from the inside, basically moving supplies around, overseeing refueling ops because they look cool doing so (it would be safer if they weren't on board for that, actually), and perhaps conducting an EVA or two to connect stuff form the airlock the deep space vehicle should have (tough they could always use their capsule as an airlock). You know, just like ISS maintenance, complicated as it is, is performed from ISS, from parts delivered to it by other vehicles. The Gateway adds nothing to that, other than a bigger budget required to get started. Rune. 42 billion so far on this Constellation-derived debacle, and still some people insist on throwing more good money after bad.

The thing that really bugs me is actually calling it a "Mars Plan". That has to be a joke. The only thing that remotely advances our capability to do such a thing is that fancy "Deep Space Transport" in the powerpoints. In fact, the whole business stinks of being just an excuse to use SLS and Orion... and that is doubly insulting, because the plan actually requires neither. Let's write that again, because I think the significance is great: the current "NASA Mars Plan" does not require the Gateway Station, it does not require SLS; and it actually doesn't require Orion. Yes, I just said that. Twice. Why? Well, the end result is getting a vehicle that can do the Earth-Mars leg of the trip, with humans on board, and that is reusable. Totally behind that. I mean, it's the wrong kind of mars transfer vehicle, but hey, it's a deep space ship, and that's another discussion (but for the record, solar electric is a pretty bad idea). Also totally behind the idea of parking it in a high orbit after missions, where it can be refurbished and restocked of consumables, both fuel and life support supplies. But if you have such a vehicle, why would you need a station in lunar orbit in the first place? The vehicle is a space station more than capable of doing everything that "Gateway" does! And here comes the really bonkers part of the whole business: if it's a vehicle capable of going to Mars and back, and then be refueled for another trip, then why the heck would you need to launch it directly to the Moon in the first place? Anything capable of going to Mars and back can get itself to a high lunar orbit, and in fact doing such a trip would be a pretty fine test of its propulsion capabilities. Launch to LEO, stupid! Then, when it's in lunar orbit, you can use it to support lunar exploration as you restock it of fuel and consumables, just like this plan envisions after the initial shakeout period. As you can see, the Gateway station is completely redundant, and its main purpose becomes to delay building the ship it's supposed to serve. And SLS becomes redundant, too, because if the total mass of the vehicle is 41mT, then there are going to be at least two launchers in service in the near future capable of lofting it to LEO for a fraction of the price. One of them has its inaugural flight late this summer, BTW, if anybody wants to bring up the likelihood of any of the three options flying. And of course you don't need Orion to resupply it, since Orion is not the thing doing the resupply, just the crew transfer. So you can just as well build two of the reusable vehicles (I know, shocking to reuse a reusable space vehicle for more than one purpose ), use one for the transit to the Moon, and then board another, fully stocked by previous flights, for the second leg of the trip. Heck, the current plan envisions commercial resupply directly to lunar orbit, right? And after that long engineering rant, here comes the thing that has me really, really salty. After all those completely irrelevant, money-draining detours are out of the way (at the tune of 3billion/year for the SLS/Orion combo alone), guess what part of the plan has the more nebulous funding path, with no money, or alternative source of money, identified for it, and is conveniently scheduled at least two elections form now. Yup, you guessed it, the Deep Space Transport. I mean, even the freaking modules of Gateway have the option of being financed by international partners, slim as that may be, and of course Orion and SLS are protected by congress critters, but the DST is safely left to be funded by a future administration, with a supposed budget increase that has never happened in the whole history of the agency. That's right, the only thing that gets no money is the only thing that is necessary to go to Mars. Rune. This is no plan to Mars. This is a farce.

And what will you say when Dragon puts half a dozen humen beings on orbit? That it's ridiculous to compare, because it didn't do both in the same flight? Let's face it, it is a ridiculous comparison. The Falcon/Dragon combo is much more the shuttle NASA originally wanted (a partially reusable, safe, and most of all, economical way to lift payloads and humans to LEO) than the STS ever was. (Oh, and kudos to SpaceX for the historic achievement. Now go fulfill that manifest already!) Rune. Which is all kinds of funny, in retrospective.

Glad to hear that! Yeah, they fit a Mk3 bay, but only if you twist them 45º, to use the bigger diagonal for the wings. Anyhow, the docking bay is pretty cool... tiny quip, I would have tried to use the Hub-Max Multi-point connector (the six-way connector that has almost no use). But that's because I like to RP that the kerbals only move through kerbal-sized parts. And as for the cuppola tug, I wouldn't dream of calling dibs on something that simple. Convergent design with the same parts and all that. Give me a bit of credit in the thread if you really think I inspired it (I noticed the mention in the Kentipede's thread, BTW, thx), but I think it is very fair to say that particular pod, that's one you built. Rune. I like the looks of that Nuclear Fury, BTW.

Those are mostly accurate points. I should totally update the Lackluster, plenty of minor revisions since the one on KerbalX. As to how to evacuate a VB... Don't have an emergency in the first place! But seriously, I rarely have anything more than a standard crew of three, two at the most, the extra space is purely for RP purposes. I would like to see that docking bay when you finish it, tough! And the Drive Pod thing is very weird indeed. I have actually launched that very same file, and I've never had that happening... with any of my pods, on this file or any other. I might have to investigate further, details appreciated. Rune. AFK right now, tough, until sunday at least.

That's actually the Heinlein, a Kerbin-capable SSTO... you can grab it here if you want to take a closer look. My "Dwagon" is quite smaller: Rune. I love the new "fore by throttle" function.

Good luck on the assembly! As to the DLC, well, I won't have to purchase it, since I'm one of those that bought KSP soon enough. I might throw someone a gift coupon or something to show Squad my support, tough. But as to what parts I'll use or won't use, well, as you say, it's way too early to tell. I can guarantee you one thing, tough, I will always post ships that everybody can use on RSUV. Not that I won't post ships with DLC content, but RSUV is for everyone, so just like with mods, I will keep this thread for what it's for, and mayhaps post elsewhere whatever isn't appropiate here. Who knows, I might bring back the skunkworks if the DLC parts are really cool, but behind a paywall. Rune. And if that encourages Squad to make the parts stock in a future update, well, even better.

Considering that LM seems to need a 2.5m fairing, and that would make the S-IVb 3.75m... yeah, I'd say 5m parts are also kind of implied, if the proportions are to be kept. Then again, if we need three stages to lift off from kerbin, the F-1's are going to be crap, or the tankage is going to be made of lead. Rune. I'm quite interested to see what they did there.

Yup, you caught the mistake I made while I was obsessing with the thing I had written right. Well, as long as I learn something, right? Rune. And I'll stop the OT now.

I don't think that is the past form of pay... That sounds a bit weird... "I would move it so it went my way, and be both paying". Yeah, more than a bit weird, I still think some form of past would be better. I'm pretty sure "I would move it so it went my way, and be both had to pay" would be correct, but with paid somehow it sounds a bit funny. Rune. Yeah, that's my grammatical rule, wether something "sounds funny" or not.

Whoa. That LM looks sick! And the fact that it heralds 1,875m parts is a big reveal indeed. Well, you got me hyped, that's for sure. Rune. Now excuse me, I have a magazine to read.

Well, we are on different sides of a pretty arbitrary line... how would you feel if our places were reversed, and I was saying I didn't mind to pay for it? Would you argue that even though you get it free, I shouldn't pay either? Where does Squad draw the line between early adopters and others? Because form this side, if the line was moved, I'd move it so that it went my way, and we both paid*, but you clearly see things the opposite way. Not that any of us is impartial, so yeah, I suppose we will end up agreeing to disagree. *Non-english speaker note: in what tense should that "to pay" be? I took by best guess, but it's nagging me, so if I can use this opportunity to learn, thx in advance! Rune. And a good thing you don't have to buy the optional DLC, then.

Well, they made me a promise that I had pretty much forgotten, and then they went and kept it. You see, back when I bought the game (2012), I really didn't expect KSP to still be a thing by now, or squad be so successful with it, or the game ever getting to where I would call it finished... andas much as I want more things in KSP, if Squad called it quits tomorrow, I wouldn't feel cheated in any way. Besides, as I'm saying, I'm kind of feeling obliged to buy this for somebody else, because I've enjoyed the game way too much for the ...15$ I paid for it? Do you also think I paid too little, BTW, because I bought 0.17? Rune. I kind of do.

Wait, a DLC that I get for free because I have been here for like forever? And here I was thinking getting yet another update this week was already something very cool, considering I bought this game so freaking long ago! Congrats @SQUAD on going the extra mile to be the bestest game company I've ever been a customer to. Totally understand your necessity to create new revenue streams for KSP, and amazed at your generosity with your early backers. Rune. Heck, I'm thinking I'll buy the DLC for somebody else, just to show my appreciation.

Congrats on the release! Rune. Will have to check it tomorrow, 2:16 here.

Mmmm... it's been ages since I built a lander. Why do so, if I can use a kerbin SSTO that launches itself, and has huge tankage space by definition? Plus, I get to recover and/or reuse everything, so it's the most efficient way, fund-wise. Besides, with a proper fuel depot network, a Kerbin-capable SSTO can get itself almost anywhere, so there's hardly a need for a mothership. Maybe some help for the really difficult ejections, like Moho, but that's about it. You must watch a lot of challenges, where the design priority is usually mass, not cost, and it's usually done in a single launch. Rune. And even then, I would use a SSTA, because I hate throwing stuff away.

It's not a bad SSTO. I gave the first one a try, and the main mistake was indeed the front wheel. But apart from that, and taking out the very excessive intake are (which I solved by just taking out all the precoolers and associated intakes, gaining much drag reduction in the process), it's just a little overpowered for its weight class. Then again, perfect for adding cargo on top. I would add a bit extra liquid fuel (I 'only' got 2.2km/s out of it empty of cargo in LKO), probably by changing the wings into BigS sections to reduce part count (and frankly, ugliness), and mayhaps lengthening the NERVA pods if it'll still handle the weight, and call it a pretty decent bird for its stated purpose. Rune. Oh, and the tail plane was not tweaked to yaw only, hence the yaw when rolling.

I never stopped! I may have slowed down a bit, but that's because I am more or less happy with what I've got, and instead of spending all the time in the VAB and the testing save, I've been advancing my career save like, a lot. You should see it, it's glorious. Moho is pretty much all tamed, and I've got stuff outgoing to everywhere but Eve, with a sizeable Dunian flotilla only a few weeks from orbital insertion. Plus, I've decided Kerbin didn't have enough moons, so there's a standing order of capturing all Class E's that happen to come close by, and an kerbolnaut corp that's frankly crowding the KSC (61, and I still pick up everybody that shows with a special name). So far I've got six rocks with two more incoming, and still no magic boulder. One of these days! Rune. Still in the first in-game year, tough.

Well, the station is up. Grab it here! Now, let's see how many of you feel up to the task of doing this ultra-precise docking. I'll be very happy if you provide 'visual confirmation' that there are a lot of expert KSP players out there! I really like how it turned out. From the incredibly smooth semi-automatic gravity turn, to the tidy 110 part count in orbit, definitely one of my tighter designs. I don't think you can take out a single part and still have all the features it has, like say, full six degree rotation and translational authority with only the vernor RCS system, for example. It does require some short of docking master to make everything line up properly, so I encourage the use of both SnapDock with a tight tolerance (I have mine set to 0.995 through the .cfg), and Docking Alignment Indicator. Oh, and mind the 'launch manual' in the description, it's a tight dV budget. Rune. Did I mention it comes with a reusable booster that brings the launch cost to something around ~15k√ for the whole ~25mT, ~90k√ station?

Keeping an OP like this tidy and updated is quite a chore after a while, and a service to the community, so it does indeed deserve praise. Rune. One of this years, I'll update mine.

Well, here they are, the new booster family in KerbalX. In the end I went with RCS subsytems, and I encourage you to read the file's description, because I packed the three rockets in the same 110 part file. Next up to upload, with its own booster that cold actually fit in this family except for the fact that it is has a reusable core, a new Von Braun, the Mark XI. Now several times more difficult to put together! Rune. But very neat and tidy, both in part count and aesthetics, the two of them.

Hey, another person using control surfaces as temperature-resistant airbrakes! Nifty trick, right? Oh, and if you deploy two on opposing directions, fiddling with the control authority can get you a pitch-neutral brake. Rune. Then again, the best airbrake is the main wing.

It's been a while since I've tried, so things might have changed (note: I just checked, they haven't), but I've always found that if I attach a connector port to the winch (the KIS part, the one you are using now actually to join the things), then attach the stuff to the connector port, things work out fine. Rune. I should just fire KSP as soon as I open the forum tab.

Nah, it's more of a game issue (the game takes a while between noticing you are in a dockable position and noting down the positions of all parts to merge the vessels), and I'm sure I could solve it with a couple of undock/redocks. Now that the ring is whole, and all ports aligned, the only issue is that I didn't bring a Klaw to move that straight corridor easily. And of course, I found out SnapDock is very much not a silver bullet, you have to still take it as an ultra-precise dock. But you know, you will be able to try yourselves real soon, this thing is getting posted for sure as an update to my venerable Von Braun Station. And I really like the launcher I built for it. The margin is razor-thin (~100m/s left at 75kms circular), but I've worked out an autopilot procedure that lets you hit it every time, without touching WASD and with a single SAS mode change. And only ~11k√ to boost the ~100k√ station if you recover the core near KSC. VICTORY!!! ...is it too late to mention you could have started with the drills connected to the winch in the SPH? Rune. Perseverance is the mother of success.

It wasn't that hard to find.